>GP – RN: Richard North gives A Personalised Example Of Ukip’s Endemic Corruption and shows just how long and how widely the corruption has existed in Ukip.

.

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~

.

Hi,

further to m,y post regarding this widely covered presentation of Ukip’s endemic corruption CLICK HERE, which was in both the blogosphere and the legacy media,

Richard North has shown there is nothing new about this Ukip corruption of basic democratic principles and their unethical rigging of selection processes and elections, both internally as a party and thus corrupting UK elections, North has given details of his own direct experience and then the desperate and dishonest efforts of Ukip to try to belittle and denigrate his factual reporting of such matters.

The trouble with doing reviews of Times pieces is that they are behind the paywall, so you can’t just link to them and rely on the reader to click-through to get the details, thereby only having to publish the bare bones of the story. You have to post virtually the whole thing, which sometimes means giving more emphasis to a story than it merits.

This would have been the case with this not very important story, albeit on the front page (above). It’s about UKIP rigging their own selection procedures for MEP candidates. Fortunately, though, the Independenthas run it, which means I don’t have to go into the detail.

The reason I needed to mention it at all is to make a quick point, as part of a more general piece about Ukip, correcting what appears to be a standard attack briefing that party supporters use to libel me on comment threads, in a usually forlorn attempt at character assassination.

The claim is made that I resigned the party “before I was pushed”, after the election of Godfrey Bloom as Yorkshire Region MEP in 2004. To stop this falsehood spreading it, I have to rebut it. In fact, I resigned in 2003, in protest at the way the selection procedure had been rigged, and the way Farage, with the complicity of David Lott, then party chairman, quite deliberately blocked the appeal which could have set aside this selection and put me in pole position.

It is the case, therefore, that Ukip has been rigging its selection processes for many years, which partly explains why so many of the current batch of MEPs are such dross. Any such assertion from me, though, brings forward the accusation that I hold a “grudge” against The Dear Leader – so it is useful to have the legacy media detail other examples of rigged selection – doubtless because it too has a “grudge”.

Actually, no one who knows me would ever suggest that I had such a base relationship with a man with whom I shared a desk for four years, and for whom I wrote speeches. Life is far too short. And even if I had become a Ukip MEP, I would almost certainly have resigned over the embarrassing Kilroy debacle, so the past hasn’t been changed that much. Right now, I would still be out on my own.

Rather than a grudge, what I do have is the most profound contempt for Farage – the calm, icy sort. Any passion has long gone. And that’s actually a very different thing. Outside the cult, his incompetence, dishonesty and other less than savoury personal attributes do not really support any other view, but above all else, his attempts actively to block policy development have to be the most important reasons for regarding him in such an unfavourable light.

Overall, this “rolling dysfunction” is holding back the party and threatens to bring down the entire anti-EU movement. An example of the immediate effects are picked up by Dr Eric Edmund, a perceptive critic of Ukip and its leader. He links to yet another train-wreck interview, this one with current chairman, Steve Crowther, graphically illustrating the policy chaos that exists within the party.

This is chaos which intensifies by the hour, after Farage disowned a policy on camera, despite it having been minted by deputy leader Nutall at the Doncaster conference in September – of which Farage was apparently unaware. That left him to admit he had “misspoken“, after being forced to acknowledge that the policy on sex education remained party policy.

However, frequenting – as one does – the occasional comment thread, I recently had my own personal epiphany, coming to the realisation that Ukip’s root problem is that its people don’t even understand what policy is. Even with the benefit of a thoroughly-grounded seminar in the principles of policy-making, I asserted, they wouldn’t understand what they were being told, much less be able to put it into practice.

What, in essence, the party is producing is a list of aspirations rather than policies. The core failure is the lack of any connection between what they want to happen, and the means of making those things happen, in such a way that one can be assured that the outcomes are deliverable. This confusion between aspiration and policy means that the party can never progress to a state of coherence.

Party supporters, on the other hand (and not entirely unreasonably), point to the similar inadequacies of the established parties. But this simply highlights the further failure to understand the nature of politics. It is for the challengers, with no track record, to demonstrate their capabilities. Conventionally, this is done through the mechanism of policy statements – something which Ukip has so far failed to do.

Over the months to come, this failing will become increasingly evident, as Mr Cameron unveils his “play”, with which he seeks to undermine and eventually destroy the upstart. Putting together a series of technical measures, complete with some theatrical contrast provided by apparently obstructive Poles, he will attempt to do this by delivering a policy which shows that he has the potential to control immigration from within the EU.

On the other hand, Ukip – despite making immigration its core issue, eliding it with its anti-EU sentiment – has failed yet to deliver a credible (or any) policy on how it would control immigration from outwith the EU.

It has failed in this context to realise that “controlling our borders” is not a policy, per se, but an aspiration – and a wholly unrealistic one at that. As long as the UK admits 34 million visitors to this country each year – the majority without visas – it has effectively ceded perimeter control, the system then relying on other layers and stratagems.

The party might be better off calling for control over immigration policy. That is an altogether more realistic and focused aspiration than “controlling and managing our borders”, which it currently tells us it would seek to do. The act or process of “controlling and managing” is exactly that – an act or process – a means to an end. In policy terms, it is meaningless without declared objective and then the detail of how the controlling and managing would be done.

Nor indeed does it help having Ukip telling us that: “We will extend to EU citizens the existing points-based system for time-limited work permits”. That does not begin to constitute a policy. Nor even is it, in itself, a component of a policy.

To have the makings of a policy, the putative policy would have to be directed to, and linked with, a specific objective or outcome. It would then have to be couched in such terms as to make it clear that it could contribute to the declared objective – whatever that might be. Any system or process, as such, is blind – and has as much a capability to obstruct as support any particular policy line.

But where the real policy wonks play is in co-ordination – the thing known more commonly as “joined up policy”. The “perfect” policy is one thing, but can get a little bit raggy when you have to take other considerations into account. For instance, you might well come up with the best in highly-polished defence policies, only to have it fall apart when your foreign policy delivers you enemies you didn’t want, didn’t expect and can’t fight – a bit like UK policy really.

Here, the rank amateurism of Ukip comes to the fore, best evident when one reads that: “UKIP would not seek to remain in the European Free Trade Area (EFTA) or European Economic Area (EEA) while those treaties maintain a principle of free movement of labour, which prevents the UK managing its own borders”.

Now here one must recall that Ukip hasn’t actually declared what it is trying to achieve, and we also know that “managing” borders is not a policy as such, but a process. So we end up with a political party that is prepared to ditch a proven and workable trade relationship because it interrupts an indeterminate process aimed at an undefined effect, with no specified outcome.

In this event, we are open to the suggestion that Ukip may be well-motivated and be seeking a desirable outcome. But since the party has neither defined its preferred outcome nor any credible means by which it might achieve it, we can be excused from accepting that it has any policies.

Meanwhile, we can see Mr Cameron’s policy being rolled out, the overall objective undeclared but loosely translated as “stuff Ukip”. Helping in this noble endeavour are his allies who are talking down immigration. They are also rubbishing the “Norway option”, something they have in common with Ukip – which must tell you something.

Meanwhile, we have the entertaining prospect of theatrical Poles, providing the backcloth for Mr Cameron’s stunning victory to come. The harder he has to battle, the better and more convincing he will look.

If Ukip had policies, of course, it would be easier to assess Mr Cameron’s games, by reference to what Ukip had on offer. One would simply compare what is with what could be. That’s the way politics is supposed to work. Poor Ukip, though, hasn’t discovered this yet – and Farage never will. If his party grows up, things might be different but, for the moment, contempt seems in order for the Peter Pan of politics.

Justin Adams pilot of Farage’s plane, were he still alive, might disagree with Nigel Farage’s claim “I’m a little bit more aware of others than perhaps in my worst moments I would have been before.”

.

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~

.

Nigel Farage interview: ‘To do what I’ve done, you have to lack self-awareness’

Four weeks ahead of the European parliament elections, Ukip’s leader is trying to stay fit and sober, and to exercise a bit of self-censorship. He still won’t talk policy – but will admit that it’s Labour voters his party now needs to win over

‘I think I’m just about within the rules. I think I’ve kept just the right side of the line. Albeit pushing right up to it, sure’ … Ukip leader Nigel Farage. Photograph: Richard Rayner/NNP

Nigel Farage hasn’t changed a bit, and yet everything is different. He suggests we meet in a village in Stockton-on-Tees for a “lovely pub lunch”, which turns out to consist of three pints of ale, lots of cigarettes, and no food whatsoever. Already he is hoarse, and it’s only day two of his grand tour of the north. “I gave myself a stern talking-to yesterday on the way up to Sheffield, and told myself not to overdo it,” but then 600 supporters turned up for Ukip’s launch rally – “It was like a Billy Graham meeting!” – and so of course the evening got a bit out of hand, and he got to bed at “oh, you know, aherm, five past”. But straight after lunch he bounds back on to the tour bus – “I’ve got to go and liberate a country” – and sets off for a nearby town walkabout, which winds up in another pub. Dressed in a startling mustard corduroy ensemble, and mobbed by a scrum of local media, he looks like the happiest man in the world.

But by his normal standards, this is an operation of military discipline. If all goes to plan, his party is four weeks away from pulling off “one of the biggest upsets in British political history”, and its leader is taking no chances. If Tony Blair, as Roy Jenkins once said, approached the 1997 election “as if carrying a Ming vase across a polished floor”, then Farage is inching towards 22 May like a barmaid balancing an overloaded beer tray.

He now travels with a security detail of four big men in suits and earpieces, which is costing Ukip a fortune and driving him mad. “I’m a completely free spirit, and of course these guys are used to meticulous timing, so I hate it.” But he was whacked over the head with a placard in Margate recently, “and if I hadn’t had them with me I’d have been in hospital”. He watched the first televised debate with Nick Clegg, “And I thought I was irritable. Bit red. A touch sweaty, possibly. So I went into training for the second debate. I did, I did! Cos I thought, this is really important, this actually really bloody matters. I’ve got to get this right, I’ve got to get myself in shape for this.” For four whole days he didn’t drink, he went walking on the North Downs, had a few morning swims, “and actually got myself into a position where I wasn’t knackered, I wasn’t boozed up, and I was actually fit to do the debate. And I think it worked.” He did have one glass of red just before the second debate, but only really on principle. “We got to the green room and there was just mineral water! I said: ‘We can’t be doing with this sort of thing, we want a bottle of white and a bottle of red or I’m not going on.’ “

He has also had to learn how to say as little as possible – something else he clearly hates. “But we are fighting this election on who governs our country,” so Farage point-blank refuses to specify a single Ukip policy before 22 May, other than withdrawal from Europe (“Oh, and bringing back grammar schools, you can have that”). He even refuses to rule out any of the policies that featured in the party’s 2010 manifesto, a document he describes as a “load of late-night ramblings” and has never actually read. Will he not even rule out one of its more memorable pledges, the compulsory dress code for taxi drivers? “I’ve burned all 400-odd pages of it, burned it all, so I’m not prepared to discuss any of it.”

Self-censorship doesn’t really suit Farage, so he resorts to suppressed giggles and frantic gurning whenever he won’t let himself answer a question, casting himself more as a mate planning a surprise birthday party than a slippery politician evading scrutiny. When it comes to Ukip policies already on the record, if he can’t defend them then he says they’re simply nothing to do with him. For example, the party now requires all candidates to confirm that they have no skeletons in the closet that could cause embarrassment to the party, but what does that actually mean? “I’ve no idea. ‘Could cause an embarrassment’ could mean almost anything, couldn’t it? I just hope I’m exempted.” Are any candidates likely to disqualify themselves on the basis of this clause? “Depends how ambitious they are, I suppose. Oh, I don’t know, I’m surprised they used the phrase to be honest. But as I say, I don’t run everything.”

Nigel Farage is enormously pleased with the Ukip posters he launched this week – if anything ‘we should have gone further, really’ Photograph: Tom Maddick/Ross Parry Farage knows he can’t rely on the party’s original support base – “very middle-class, very below the M4, ex-military” – to deliver victory next month. So the privately educated ex-stockbroker from Kent is now chasing northern urban voters, and claims his party has become working-class. “What we’ve got to do in the next four weeks is rattle the Labour party. That’s the big job for Ukip now. The middle-class Tories in Wiltshire have already decided whether they’re going to vote Ukip on 22 May or not – and a lot of them are. So for the next four weeks the focus is entirely on the Labour vote. If we’re going to win these elections, those are the voters we want to get.”

He is probably wise to steer clear of policy detail, for Ukip is now such an ideologically incoherent bandwagon that policy is no longer the point. Some of its supporters want to make dressing up for the theatre compulsory, while Farage is a libertarian who breaks the law “regularly” and says: “I’m not for laws. We need a minimum of laws. I hate big government, I hate being told what to do on a personal basis.” But even he is a bit wary of libertarianism now, “because I’ve seen some of the loonier elements. A bloke took over our youth wing and called himself a libertarian, and he’s for, I don’t know,” he shudders, “bestiality!” But he thinks he can get away with sidestepping all these contradictions, because none of them will matter on 22 May. “People are voting for difference. I think there’s a feeling among our supporters that we speak for them and no one else does.”

One problem for Farage is how to maintain his image as a chaotic amateur while communicating quite a shrewd electoral strategy. The key to winning next month, he explains, is to get the non-voters out. “Over one in five of our votes already come from non-voters. And in European elections only a third [of the electorate] vote, so it’s a massive marketplace. And the more urban the area, the lower the turnout.” If Ukip can beat Labour to first place – and the gap has closed to just a couple of points – “the grassroots pressure on Ed Miliband to promise a referendum will be irresistible. We need to get British politics into a position where, whatever the outcome of the next election, we get a referendum.”

He is enormously pleased with the Ukip posters he launched this week, one of which features a gigantic pointing finger beside the words: “26 million people in Europe are looking for work. And whose jobs are they after?” But as the BBC’s political editor asked Farage this week, if he’s so worried about Europeans taking our jobs, why does he employ his German wife as his secretary, at taxpayers’ expense? “That particular line of argument from Nick Robinson was pathetic,” he scoffs. “If that’s what he wants to focus on, then it’s a pretty poor reflection of him and the BBC in my opinion. I think it’s astonishing, simply astonishing. I mean, it just shows you how trivial the whole thing is.” He has to employ his wife, he says, because nobody else could possibly work such antisocial hours so closely with him.

But other MEPs manage to employ secretaries to whom they are not married, don’t they?

“How can you compare my life to any other MEP? I mean, come on, it’s crackers, isn’t it? Look, other MEPs do five days a week in Brussels and pop home for weekends. I’m working seven bloody days a week, all the hours God sends. If you include the socialising, it’s over 100 hours a week.” His wife is not the only immigrant he has employed, it emerges; he has hired other Europeans, “because they had specialist skills – languages in particular”. But he says British people should always try to employ a Brit over an immigrant wherever possible. “And is that discriminatory? Maybe it is.” Is that what he would always do? “Of course I would, yeah.”

The posters have been condemned across the political spectrum as racist, divisive and ignorant. He knew the finger-pointing poster would be controversial, but can’t for the life of him see how it could cause offence. “Shouldn’t do. We should have gone further, really. What we could have done is say we’ve opened the door to 425 million people who are after your jobs. That would have been stronger.” I suspect the decision not to had something to do with criticism of a notorious Ukip leaflet last year, which warned: “The EU will allow 29 million Bulgarians and Romanians to come to the UK.” As the combined population of both countries did not, in the event, relocate to Britain on 1 January, you’d think he might be embarrassed about the baseless alarmism, but not a bit of it.“Not at all. Two reasons, really. I think we don’t know the true figures yet. And there’s also the quality debate. People hate talking about this, but if you look at the Met crime figures for Romanian arrests, there have been 28,000 in London in the last five years. Is there a problem? Yeah. There is a problem.” Is he saying there is a culture of criminality among Romanians? “Bound to be. You have to go and see it to understand it. I’ve visited camps in Romania and Bulgaria, I’ve got a pretty good understanding.” Should British people be wary of Romanian families moving into their street? “Well, of course, yeah.”The poster campaign was funded by Ukip’s main donor, the businessman Paul Sykes, but I’m not convinced that relations between the two men are quite as harmonious as Farage says, because he looks a little strained when I mention Sykes’ name. The pair considered dozens of different poster designs, he says – so who had the final say? “Me.” Sykes would have paid for posters he didn’t choose? “We agreed. But if we hadn’t agreed, we wouldn’t have had them.” After a brief pause, “I’m not for sale,” he suddenly barks. “I’m not for sale.” But Sykes’ money is crucial, isn’t it? “Well, his money makes a huge difference to us, of course it does,” he says briskly. “I get on incredibly well with him, we’re pretty eye-to-eye on lots of issues, and getting agreement on this campaign and how to do it has been very easy. Very easy.” Yet Sykes still hasn’t promised to bankroll Ukip’s general election campaign. He says he’s waiting to see how the party performs in May, so I ask Farage what Ukip has to do to secure Sykes’ backing for 2015. “Well, you’d better ask him that.” Hasn’t Sykes told him? “No.”

The party’s finances are a perennial headache for Farage, and like most Ukip MEPs he has donated a chunk of his own money – £11,000 last year, £4,000 this year. It was recently reported that the party is drawing up an MEPs’ charter, demanding a compulsory donation from each MEP of £50,000, but Farage says it will stipulate only a “reasonable sum”, which in his case will be “two to three grand”. He recently described himself as “broke”, but has a household income of just over £100,000. How can Ukip be a working-class party if it will only accept candidates wealthy enough to donate thousands? “They wouldn’t have their jobs as MEPs if it weren’t for Ukip. They’re not getting their jobs as individuals.”

“I can guarantee one thing. That I haven’t done it for personal gain. But how I’ve spent my time and money, and whether I’ve spent it because I’m an MEP, or because I’m Ukip, I would suggest to you is a very grey area. It’s a difficult divide. I’ve made no bones about it that I would use the wherewithal provided by the European parliament to go round Britain and campaign against Britain’s membership of the European Union. I think I’m just about within the rules. I think I’ve kept just the right side of the line. Albeit pushing right up to it, sure.”

And if he has strayed over the line and broken the rules? He doesn’t think it matters. “I mean, given the abuses for personal gain that have gone on with expenses in Westminster, I don’t think the general public are that interested in whether I’ve strictly observed the rules on what is campaigning and what isn’t. We always knew these criticisms would come at some point, but I have a completely clean conscience. If someone in Brussels wants to martyr me for that, then, well … well, they won’t, they won’t.”

He told the Today programme last week that he would be happy to have his expenses independently audited, but he is now keen to correct this. “No, I didn’t. I said if every other British MEP wants to then I would. I mean, I am not going to be one out of 73 that is held up as an example of all that is wrong with the European Union. After all, I’ve been saying that myself for years, so this is absolutely ludicrous. If all 73 people want to go on to a new regime, then of course I’ll do it, but to be singled out in this way is frankly ridiculous.”

The other charge levelled against Farage is that he can be a hot-headed bully, so I ask when he last raised his voice at a colleague. “Um, that’s a very good question. I had some sharp words with somebody two days ago. I told him to sharpen his effing act up. He said to me today, thank you for that. But I very rarely lose my temper. You know, really lose my temper. Very rarely, very rarely.” What about a barky growl? “Oh, I do that quite regularly.”

He is one of the jolliest politicians I’ve ever met – exuberantly self-deprecating (“Why would I take paternity leave? I’m absolutely useless!”), quick to laugh, great fun, and uncommonly at ease in his own skin. But I would guess that, when provoked, he can go off like a bomb. Interestingly, he says of the Clegg debates: “He really, really tried to dig me in the ribs in that second one, but I knew I was calm, I knew I was in control. I think if he’d gone down that line in the first debate, I might well have snapped. Which I would have enjoyed – but probably no one else would have.”

The day after our meeting, Farage had to suspend one of the stars of Ukip’s first ever party political broadcast, a council candidate, after racist tweets from his Twitter account were exposed. When I interviewed Farage in January last year, he was still a maverick figure on the political margins, and for all his charisma, it was hard to see how he could protect himself from coming to grief through his colleagues’ bigotry and battiness. I still can’t work out whether what he’s achieved since then says more about the failings of the traditional Westminster class than it does about Farage’s own acumen. But his apparent immunity to any amount of Ukip scandals is looking less and less like just good luck.

Nigel Farage knows he’s lucky, having narrowly escaped dying when a plane towing a Ukip banner crashed on election day 2010. Photograph: Neil Hall/INS News Agency Ltd Then again, as he points out himself, he is a very lucky man. It’s surprisingly easy to forget that on election day in 2010 Farage very nearly died in a plane crash, when a Ukip banner the light aircraft was towing became tangled in the tail fin. At the time it seemed almost like a bad joke – a metaphor for an eccentric political career nose-diving into oblivion – but obviously not to Farage. “Well, it was horrible. Yeah. It’s one of those things I still think about.” He can remember “every single millisecond of it”, and thought he was going to die. What went through his mind? “All sorts of things that shouldn’t have done,” he laughs. “I’m not going to tell you.” Go on. “Well, I thought a bit about things I’d done well, things I’d done badly. I thought about all the different girlfriends I’ve had, you know, about different forks in the road at different times.” Was he seized by regrets? “Well, we all have regrets in our life – but I’m married, you see,” he laughs, “so I can’t answer that.”

He thought about phoning his wife. “But then I reasoned that probably that phone call would haunt them.” If he had called, he would have said: “Sorry I’ve been such an appalling husband and a not very good father. But how would that help? It wouldn’t have helped. So I just sat there quietly. And then when the end comes, and you’re careering towards the earth, there’s almost a sense of resignation. Let’s hope it’s over quickly.”

He came to rest upside down, his head two inches from the ground – “That was the difference between snapping my neck and not.” Covered in fuel oil, he thought he was about to burn to death. “And that was terrible. And I thought, nobody will ever know I survived this crash. And then, after a few minutes, it hadn’t caught fire, and I began to think it might be OK. But I couldn’t breathe, I just could not breathe. And I thought, you know, all those years of smoking – if I get out of this I’ll never touch another cigarette as long as I live, I’ll be a really good person. If I get out of this I’m going to live such a good life, I’m going to be such a good person.” And has he kept any of his promises? “No! None of them.”

He thinks that since the crash, “I’m a little bit more aware of others than perhaps in my worst moments I would have been before.” Awareness of others has never been his strong point, he chuckles softly. “I think it’s been a weakness. But I wouldn’t be doing what I’m doing otherwise. To do what I’ve done in this job, I think you have to lack self-awareness.”

There are many reasons why Nigel Farage would not wish to have a full investigation of UKIP corruption and the practices of its leadership and as for a full forensic accounting of how public money has been used for private gain and huge amounts of money have seemingly gone missing would of course be strenuously avoided – no doubt with the intent to both hang onto personal gains and avoid prison!

UKIP Senior Backer & NEC Member Alan Bown has Advocated Fraud for Funding by members of Farage’s Party diverting taxpayers’ cash to fund party promotion and events, in complete disregard of the criminality of the suggestion!

Ukip MEPs urged to breach allowance rules

Alan Bown has suggested that MEPs’ record of ­contributions to party funds be ­vetted before they are reselected. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/Press Association

A leading member of the UK Independence party, which has railed against the European “gravy train”, has demanded its MEPs contribute £10,000 each from their parliamentary allowances and salaries towards the costs of the party’s British headquarters or risk being deselected.

Alan Bown, a party donor who sits on its national executive committee, wrote to Ukip representatives in Brussels in 2011 suggesting they should be “good value for money” and divert EU cash to the party’s headquarters or face the sack, according to leaked documents. He pointedly added that thousands of pounds of EU allowances could be claimed without submitting receipts.

Party leader Nigel Farage and the party’s national executive committee subsequently put pressure on the MEPs to pay more to support the running of the party, sources said. Ukip sources say MEPs are still placed under “immense pressure” to contribute to the party.

Bown’s proposals prompted a furious response from the party’s MEPs, who feared they would be at risk of breaking the law if they diverted funds. Another leaked email shows that the party’s immigration spokesman, Gerard Batten, warned Ukip officials that he and other MEPs could face jail if they carried out Bown’s demands.

The disclosures are confirmation that the party’s MEPs have been under increasing pressure to divert their allowances into the party’s UK operations, in breach of EU rules.

EU documents state that allowances “are only eligible when spent on activities and objects which are directly linked to the office of a member of the European parliament”. Bown, a former bookmaker, sent an email to national executive members in January 2011 with an attached document titled “MEPs’ Financial Contributions to the Party“.

He complained that MEPs had failed to contribute to the party and pointed out that it costs £125,000 to get each of them elected, questioning whether they were good value for money.

Arguing that the party’s headquarters, Lexdrum House in Devon, spends a lot of money getting MEPs elected, he added: “In my opinion the MEPs have a clear duty to help finance Lexdrum House.”

The email points out that to get on a Ukip selection list, MEP candidates have to sign a “code of conduct” document complying with Bown’s demand that MEPs “provide substantial financial support to the central party out of income”.

A version of the code of conduct from 2008 has been leaked to the Guardian. It says the party’s MEPs pledge to “submit to oversight and act on advice from the party regarding the use of parliament allowances and expenses”.

In his email, Bown, 71, says: “Most MEPs draw a salary of £80K+ per year plus generous expenses of approximately £320K some of which does not require receipts.”

He said he had spoken to fellow Ukip peer and former party leader Lord Pearson and suggested he had agreed that this year’s reselected candidates should be judged in part on their payments to the party.

“Before an MEP is allowed to stand for re-election for 2014, the NEC should look at their record over the previous 5 years to see what he or she had achieved and particularly their financial contributions to the party.

“The NEC reserves the right to blackball any MEP from standing again if their record was poor.”

Bown’s email prompted an angry response from a number of MEPs, insiders said. A few days later, Batten, who has called for Muslims in Britain to sign a pledge of allegiance, sent an email claiming that following Bown’s advice would risk a criminal record and jail.

“The staff and office allowance combined is £253k,” said Batten. “This money can only be spent according to the rules on staff and offices. Only £42k of that does not require ‘receipts’. To use it for personal or political purposes is against the rules. Are you suggesting we should use it illegally? Are you suggesting we should risk prison to help the party financially?”

Two weeks after the email exchange, some MEPs met Bown, Farage and Stuart Wheeler at the Farmers Club in Whitehall, where they were informed that they were each under pressure to increase contributions to the party.

The party argues the EU is a waste of money and calls for Britain’s withdrawal.

It comes amid concern that the party’s rapid growth in popularity and expensive European parliament election campaign is not being supported by a corresponding rise in income.

It was reported by the Times on Saturday that the EU authorities have been asked to investigate whether some of Ukip’s staff in the UK are being paid from EU money, in breach of regulations.

The disclosures will prove embarrassing for the party as it tries to portray itself as a realistic and influential political force. Some party officials have privately voiced concern that money pledged by Paul Sykes, the former Tory donor, has not come through when they need to fund the European election campaign. Neil Hamilton, the former Tory MP, told the Observer this month: “”So far we haven’t seen the colour of his money.”

Ukip has come under increasing scrutiny over its alleged misuse of EU expenses. Tom Wise, the party’s former MEP for East of England, was jailed for expenses fraud after paying himself £36,000.

Two of the party’s senior members have repaid more than £37,000 meant for office staff after diverting it to party workers based in the UK.

Nikki Sinclaire, MEP for the West Midlands, told the Guardian last year that Farage told her the party would not be able to gain access to extra funds meant for a new political grouping without her support.

The party denied her claims.

Batten told the Guardian on Friday that he has never broken the rules.

“My donations to the party are made out of my personal income,” he said. Ukip said: “Alan Bown is an extremely generous donor to Ukip and is one of 16 members of the party’s NEC. He is well known for seeking to encourage other members of the party including MEPs to seek to emulate his own outstanding levels of generosity. All of our MEPs conduct their financial affairs honestly and comply with the rules covering allowances and expenses. Any donations they make to the party come from their post-tax salaries.”

Seems UKIP Caught Stealing Tax Payers’ Money AGAIN

.

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~

.

Hi,

further details to come later but it is a lovely day out & UKIP become ever less significant in domestic politics as they have zero MPs and little hope of ever getting any and very few councillors out of the many 1,000s in the UK; of the 149 elected a significant number have jumped ship many on the grounds of overt stupidity others due to their racist views and yet others even some in office still are marginalised by their criminality – not to mention those who have fallen out or seen through UKIP’s leader & his claque!

Don’t forget Nigel Farage, Graham Booth, Stuart Agnew, David Bannerman, Jeffrey Titford, Mike Nattrass, Derek Clark, John Wittacker, Mark Croucher, Tom Wise & various Councillors have fallen foul of British Courts regarding money or have been forced to repay substantial sums of tax payers’ money perloined from the EU or have been investigated by OLAF and either found guilty or at least not exhonourated!

Details later.Back later!

Ukip faces inquiry

into abuse of party funds

Nigel Farage is hoping for a breakthrough at the general election next year

·

Nigel Farage is hoping for a breakthrough at the general election next yearPA

Nigel Farage faces an official inquiry into allegations that Ukip improperly diverted taxpayers’ money to fund its political operations.

Ukip staff were instructed to send invoices to a European body for work done in Britain. A whistleblower has told The Times that this meant that money was diverted back to the party’s headquarters, apparently against parliamentary rules.

The allegations are set to trigger an official “misuse-of-funds” investigation into Ukip before the critical European Parliament elections.

Mr Farage hopes that victory on May 22 will provide enough momentum for Ukip to achieve a breakthrough at the general election next year. That prospect, however, has brought greater scrutiny both of Ukip’s funding and its claim to be a political insurgency.

Ukip’s MEPs have received more than £2.4 million in allowances and expenses since their election in 2009, not including travel, despite having one of the worst attendance records of any party. However, the party’s alleged misuse of additional funds, which it receives as a member of a political grouping, the EFD, threatens to cause a huge embarrassment.

European Parliament rules state that public money paid to fund Europe-wide political groups such as the EFD may not “be used to finance political parties at national and European level”. However, a former member of the Ukip press office in London claimed that staff were instructed to invoice the EFD group in Brussels. The whistleblower said: “I was paid by the EFD group in the European Parliament, even though I worked exclusively for Ukip in the UK. The money was paid into my bank account directly from the EFD Group.”

The whistleblower knew of three other people paid in this way, even though they too worked only for the national party. “It was my understanding that the press office had been funded this way for some time and continued to be so after I left.”

The Times has seen evidence that two other members of Ukip staff were paid directly from EU funds in 2012 and 2013. The Vice-President of the European Parliament, Edward McMillan-Scott, said that he was referring the evidence of alleged misuse to its governing body, the Bureau, which meets on Monday.

“This appears to be a misuse of funds, which would be improper,” Mr Macmillan-Scott, a Liberal Democrat MEP for Yorkshire and Humberside, said.

“I will raise this with the Bureau and ask the relevant authorities to look into it. On the face of it, it looks as though this contravenes the rules of the European Parliament. This is taxpayer’s money and should not be diverted to political parties, in the UK or anywhere else,” he said.

“This is a party which promised to be transparent and not to use slush funds. This looks like double standards and needs to be investigated before the European elections so that the public can make up their mind.”

Ukip said in a statement last night: “Ukip MEPs are careful to observe European parliamentary rules when spending resources on advancing the goal of British withdrawal. Ukip has always worked hard to ensure that demarcations between EFD employees and party employees are properly observed. Ukip MEPs work for withdrawal from the EU just as they promised the voters that they would when elected in 2009.

“Ukip has from the outset been the biggest constituent part of the EFD group and Nigel Farage is the group leader. It is wholly legitimate and within the rules for some EFD staff to work out of London and indeed staff from other groups that include other British political parties do the same.

“After the rapid growth of the party, Ukip has now put in place a bi-annual review as an extra check to ensure that staff responsibilities remain appropriately demarcated and that the actual work patterns of staff remain consistent.”

If it is found to have broken the rules, Ukip may have to pay back the cash. Two years ago two MEPs had to return £37,000 that they had improperly diverted to national party workers.

to revisit Steve Allison’s dishonest and rather foolish comments dealt with at CLICK HERE The silly little man seems to believe he has the right to lie about me on Dr. Eric Edmond’s blog, which you can read at CLICK HERE

My comments are made to correct the dishonesty of Steve Allison but that he has lied about me it is probable that he has likewise lied about Junius and other facts – those who lie tend to have a patern of dishonesty in their personality and you will note that NEVER ONCE has anyone shown a single blog or publication that I have posted to be a deliberate lie or deliberate attempt to mislead or dishonestly defame.

sadly UKIP has a clear and undeniable track record of fiddling internal elections and thus regardless of Steve Allison’s offensive rejoinder.

May I suggest people study the abuse of the internet by extremist UKIP staff such as the odious and utterly dishonest Mark Croucher also the official censures of UKIP by The Data Protection Commission.

I appreciate there are those who were and are on the payrpll and seeking preferment on the gravy train who have and do lie about UKIP for personal gain.

One need only consider Nigel’s right hand Ms. Annabelle Fuller the foul mouthed liar who helped rig one of UKIP’s elections.

Steve Allison must be describing the deficiency of Farage’s testese or perhaps his own – Clearly his statement is wrong, untrue, unsound and dishonest!

One need only consider the liar and cheat Mick McGough and his criminal offensive spamming and serial dishonesty and corruption to PROVE Steve Allison’s claims to be false.

Just look at the calliber of the self seekers on The NEC and the lack of ethics of those who remain as UKIP MEPs

Pwehaps someone can cite an example, outside of dictatorships & the third world where a 92% vote – the only mittigation being that the ONLY publicity on the imposition of the new dictatorial and centra;ised Constitution was staggeringly dishonest – little wonder that UKIP completely reversed its vote when last this undemocratic concept was put forward.

Clearly 92% return from the claimed membership list is in itself far from plausible let alone that they ALL voted in favour of an EU style centralised dictatorship – Even going so far as to use The EU’s corrupt methods of if you don’t get the result you want represent the question and bully the victims to vote agai.

May I suggest a perusal of Nigel Farage’s various speeches in Ireland condemning the very methods he has chose to use for his own personal gain.

Hi Eric, well I was going to draw a line under this one but now I’m being attacked by both Junius and GL-W and so far neither have allowed any comments from me to appear on their pathetic little blogs. You do have the decency to allow comments and good on you for that. Junius and GL-W apparently only allow comments that agree with them, which of course is their right, after all they are so twisted and bile filled about UKIP that they are beyond any reasonable argument. Anyway, as someone who claims to only print true and accurate stories and knows what is going on in UKIP Junius and GL-W are well behind the times with his story describing me as a UKIP Staffer. I was never a UKIP Staffer, when I was paid by UKIP it was on a self employed contract basis, never staff, and I haven’t had any paid contract with UKIP for almost two years. So to describe me as a UKIP Staffer is hardly showing a finger on the pulse and knowledge of what is happening in UKIP. Similarly to describe ne as the UKIP Idiot of the month is a bit much since I’m not even a party member any more and haven’t been since last year, which is why having a go at me is “prety accademic” lol If they /he is going to try and sling mud then they should try to keep up to date. If they are two years behind the times as far as what a former member like me is up to then they must be well out of touch with what is going on at the moment.

Fourthly I moderate postings on my blogs to eradicate cowards unwilling to put their names to abusive, ill informed and foul languaged postings also spam as with the 20,000 offensive spams filtered out by my virus checkers from UKIP NEC member the liar Mick McGough.

Finally it is not appropriate for Steve Allison to shelter on Dr. Edmond’s blog to lie about me.

Allison be man enough to admit the truth YOU HAVE EITHER deliberately lied about me in this posting or at very least set out to abuse this blog by misleading people deliberately.

IF you believe you have a genuine complaint to make them contact me directly using your own name and I will happily publish your posting, as with all others by identifiable individuals.

You have my ‘e’Mail address and phone number openly published on my blogs so you clearly demean yourself by trying dishonestly to defame me on Eric Edmond’s blog.

Sorry you became involved Eric – I shall address Allison’s posting to my blog on my blog if he has the integrity to follow up with a posting to me as clearly your blog is a most inappropriate place for his dishonesty to continue.

Regards,Greg_L-W.

29 March 2012 00:51

I NOTE:

Having had my attention drawn to Steve Allison’s dishopnest comments about me and responding – that ‘Junius’ have also responded to his comments about them:Junius said…

Mr Allison is a liar. We have not published comments by the former UKIPPER because he had never sent us any to publish. His first comment was sent to us yesterday. And we published that!

That Mr Allison can so blatantly lie is, of course, of no surprise to us as he has turned lying on behalf of UKIP into an art form! His pathetic attempts to claim that 92% voted in favour of UKIP becoming a dictatorship is just the latest example of this.

Mr Allison claims that the Junius Team only publish comments that we agree with. More lies! There have been only four instances where we have declined to publish comments. Two were spam comments in Chinese, the other two contained nothing but foul language.

We are well aware that Mr Allison is no-longer officially a member of UKIP. However, he chose to defend UKIP’s leadership regarding the recent vote, plus he admits to watching the count. If you defend corruption then don’t be surprised to get caught in the crossfire!

So why not answer Mr Edmond’s question regarding the vote. Why wasn’t the Electoral Reform Society used to supervise the vote? And were they contacted for a quote?

The Junius Team

29 March 2012I believe we can expect much bluster and wriggling, threats and abuse from Allison as he continues to desperately defend the indefensible. I also expect the pack of the claque of cowards from EUkip to pile in with their display of dishonesty and misrepresentation both on Eric Edmond’s blog and the various UKIP controlled forums and blogs – their aggresive abuse and serial dishonestly unfortunately does much to damage UKIP and drive away the few remaining decent members who are rapidly being replaced by a particularly unpleasant, dishonest and corrupt claque of cheats and liars masquerading as some sort of political party of low repute.

Their actions speak louder than the examples given on this blog and the blogs of others such as Dr. Eric Edmond, Junius, Dr. Richard North and the like as EUkip scrapes the barrel for attention yet continues to bump along third or fourth in UK Domestic Politics which is largely a two horse race!

Fortunately in view of the odious state EUkip is in it is unlikely they will ever gain a foothold in Domestic politics as the likes of Allison, McGough, Clark, Batten, reeve, Duffy and a host of nebishes too ashamed of their own behaviour to put their name to it have all but destroyed the hopes of the many decent activists who USED to support and campaign for them.

Sadly the notable levels of EUkip are comprised of ner do wells, parasites, liars, cheats and self serving self seekers all demeaning UKIP with their back stabbing and playground bullying – forefend they might ever gain control of ANYTHING bigger than some utterly irrelevant parish council but clearly that is unlikely with so few elected offices and such low caliber unprofessional personnel.

After several days I have checked back and there is clearly no posting to me by Steve Allison, he thus lives down to expectation – clearly unable to defend his dishonest and underhand efforts to defame me and lie about me on UKIP controlled forums such as that of the dishonest and corrupt Anthony Butcher or elsewhere where he believes I have no right of reply or he can make his dishonest self serving comments with relative impunity.. .

It seems UKIP Leadership are so ashamed of their behaviour they do nothing to control the iresponsible lies of their NEC and other key personel in their efforts to dishonestly extend their corruption to defaming critics!

One must asume that with their criminal behaviour such as 20,000 offensive spam messages sent to my spam filter they hope to intimidate critics and those who support them but seek ethical politics!.

mick mcgough: In the coffee houses of England it is being claimed that there is to be a ‘clean sweep’ of political parties irregular financial activities. Your friend Mr Smith, if I remember correctly, was an advisor to UKIP on the means by which the statutory authorities can be deceived; he must be very clever. Perhaps he can tell the investigators of the means by which the Ashford Call Centre and Ashord Employment Ltd, operated a carousel movenment of donation-contributions and staff payments. Do you get payments for your erudite contributions, or do you live entirely, ‘on your parish relief’?

Geoffrey,Unlike your chum GLW I am unpaid.As before you are lying re Mr Smith but you know that and I can see no useful point in engaging with you as you are pro EU and anti UKIP

Let us consider the lies of Mick McGough in this posting on a UKIP controlled public forum:

mick mcgough: In the coffee houses of England it is being claimed that there is to be a ‘clean sweep’ of political parties irregular financial activities.

I understand there are efforts to clean up politics which must give UKIP great concern with the long list of proven frauds, lies, nepotism, convictions and Party failures in The Courts and those like Mick McGough who have been proven criminal tendencies in political terms yet still hold positions in UKIP.

We understand that there are a number of outstanding OLAF, Police and or Electoral Commission Inquiries still underway regarding UKIP staff & elected members.

Your friend Mr Smith, if I remember correctly, was an advisor to UKIP on the means by which the statutory authorities can be deceived;

At least one eMail circulated to UKIP Leadership was widely publicised, in which Andrew Smith the failed Treasurer explained how UKIP should outwit The Electoral Commission and deceive them.

he must be very clever.

Not so clever since he quit as Treasurer in much opprobrium having failed to keep good and proper accounts leaving some 28 specific questions unanswered and the books in disaray – his behaviour was utterly unprofessional as were his claims of his status as an accountant such that he was unable to attend many UKIP meetings as his employers were unwilling to release him rather than he being of the senior position he tried to lead people to believe.

Perhaps he can tell the investigators of the means by which the Ashford Call Centre and Ashord Employment Ltd, operated a carousel movenment of donation-contributions and staff payments.

A sytematic apparent theft of supporters donations in any moral or ethical terms as confirmed by the then Chairman who admitted that less than 15% of the cash income ever reached the party the donations were made to!

A situation openly colluded with by UKIP’s corrupt and incompetent leadership!

Do you get payments for your erudite contributions, or do you live entirely, ‘on your parish relief’?

It is understood that expenses are paid and no doubt in line with EU policy so enthusiastically supported by UKIP leadership they are no doubt paid at a grossly inflated rate. As to what direct payments for work done, chauffeuring, visits to continental UKIP offices no doubt including the high life led by UKIP leadership as with bordellos, hostelries and other self indulgence it is unlikely the public will ever hear the truth when one considers the £Millions of UKIP potential income that has been spirited away.

ANY promise or statement from UKIP or its leadership is all but invalid when one considers the lies of its leadership as with the lies that Tom Wise had been dismissed, no family members would be employed etc. etc.

The level of fraud in UKIP leadership is unarguable, proven and by any normal standards widespread!

Geoffrey,Unlike your chum GLW I am unpaid.

Two small points here that show Mick McGough for the liar he is – Firstly: I have NEVER met Geoffrey Collier to my knowledge we have never even been in the same County at the same time! Hardly chums. – Secondly: I have never received one penny piece for political activities save fees for media appearances to cover direct expenses and a replacement computer donated some 12 years ago by a EUroSceptic and ONE cheque for £100 from a EUroSceptic towards the costs of organising a EUroSceptic weekend meeting.

As before you are lying re Mr Smith

Geoffrey Collier is NOT lying but Mick McGough clearly is in this instance and is proven beyond any doubt to do so habitually.

but you know that

A particularly dishonest turn of phrase by Mick McGough to try desperately to defame – no doubt to try to detract from the truth and facts presented by Geoffrey Collier regarding the corruption in UKIP leadership.

and I can see no useful point in engaging with you as you are pro EU and anti UKIP

Further clear dishonesty from Mick McGough regarding Geoffrey Collier in the many 100s of postings made in public and in private correspondence I have had sight of I have NEVER ONCE seen a pro EU or anti UKIP utterance by Geoffrey Collier unlike Mick McGough whose postings and comments, general dishonesty and self serving corruption bring UKIP and the EUroSceptic cause into disrepute on a regular basis.

I once again challenge Mick McGough to establish a single fact to support his consistent lies.

The odious little man is beneath contempt in his behaviour and his dishonesty and his self serving self seeking damage done to the EUroSceptic movement in general and UKIP in particular which so greatly damages my Country and aids the EU.

I call on Mick McGough to apologise publicly to those he has so dishonestly and gratuitously defamed and withdraw his sordid presence from UKIP and other EUroSceptic organisations he befouls and damages with his proven lies and dishonest abuse aand attempted cuber bullying that besmirch the reputation of ANY ethical organisation.

It is clear that on a greatly rising tide of EUroScepticism UKIP’s failure is exacerbated by the behaviour of its aspirant supporters (cowards, cheats, liars, fraudsters and cyber bullies) and association with racism, anti homosexuality, holocaust denial, anti judaism, advocacy of violence and the dregs of EUropean politics!

The lack of leadership ability, strategy or valid tactics is a reflection of the clear lack of professionalism and disinterest in its membership or Country beyond self enrichment of a small clique and agrandisement of their claque!

Whether individuals like Independent UKIP, Skeptyk, Gothmog, KrisH and the like are merely cowards who know they are telling lies and are ashamed or are rewarded for their dishonesty and unpleasant manner, so damaging to UKIP and the EUroRealist cause and therefore having prostituted their ethics is a matter of conjecture but endlessly having them repeat their lies and feeble efforts as cyber bullies hidden behind the cowardly cloak of anonymity without being denounced by UKIP has done the party immense harm.

As a member ‘Trusted’ on the UKIP controlled squalid little Forum of Antyhony Butcher’s Independent UKIP currently leads the charge!

Everyone I’ve seen supports their assertions validly, except for 1 or 2 UKIP members. Like you. As we’ve seen.

I’ve asked repeatedly for sensitive flowers to point out where I’ve been rude. Not a single, specific instance has been quoted.

I’m I see now I’ve rattled I-UKIP’s cage, he’s responded (and of course, I can’t see it). So predictable.

Despite being a compulsive liar Mr Lance-Watkins maintains he always tells the truth in everything he says. Despite obdurate rudeness over many months you maintain you’ve never been rude. Is he grooming you to take over? You’re demonstrating increasingly familiar traits.

Clearly a dishonest attempt to mislead people as neither Independent UKIP nor any of the other maggots feeding on the corruption in UKIP, and too ashamed to use their own names when abusing people, has EVER shown a single solitary consequential inaccuracy in ANY of my many 1,000s of postings!

I am also unaware of them ever being able to materially fault those posting as Junius. I am aware they haven’t a clue who posting facts as Junius but I am aware that there is a strong possibility UKIP may find itself in Court YET AGAIN were they to interfere in someone’s employment based on their various false guesses!

I note (thanks) that Niall warry has read my blog, as do UKIP leadership and their puppets and muppets, desperately trying to find a factual inaccuracy – at which they have clearly and totally failed to date. Much as they may wish to disagree with the clearly stated opinions I also voice!

A rather foolish statement as anyone will note as Niall Warry said absolutely nothing with which he could disagree but he is so programmed to be offensive that he has made rather a fool of himself. Clearly he could not disagree with my comment as clearly he was not in conversation with me – probably too much of a coward or advised by his puppet masters that he was on far too weak ground to risk direct contact!

May I thank Steve Morson for his support in rebutting this foolish little chappie and refuting what the serial liar Independent UKIP said originally (for the umpteenth time without a shred of evidence of EVER showing a material fact posted by me to be materially inaccurate), he just keeps repeating his lines, presumably for his UKIP funded rewards – a bit like the odious liar, cheat and criminally inclined public nuisance Mick McGough!

Anyway – my thanks to Steve Morson and Niall Warry for speaking out at the risk of being lied about and abused by the dwindling army of useful idiots cyber bullying for UKIP.

Well, of course, I only have knowledge of GL-W thanks to 2 UKIP members – 1 an MEP – and I can only say, from personal experience, that he is quite fastidious about accuracy.

Piffle!

There are a number of articles that have been found to lack in integrity and accuracy. Articles with purposive intention; personal opinion and values from an individual with an axe to grind.

Yet one notes that in the many 1,000s of postings I have made on my blogs, other blogs and web sites – Forums and eMails UKIP have been unable to identify a single solitary factual error of any material consequence.

Yes I have an axe to grind – does not everyone of any ability to reason? One of those axes is that I can not stand corruption amongst those I misguidedly supported. I find use of fake identities to abuse and berate private individuals in ad hominem attacks beneath contempt, I am disgusted by betrayal by those I aided and voted for, I have nothing but contempt for UKIP leadership which has NOTHING to publicly curb the cyber bullying and clear dishonesty of some of its leadership and many of its supporters, presumably in aspirant hope of reward.

I have utter contempt for fraud, liars, cheats and those who seek self enrichment and self agrandisement willingly involved in racism, religious bigotry, anti homosexuality, anti judaism and espousing violence as a primary plank of political achievement or those willing to associate with such behaviour.

I have NEVER denied that I am an individual of VERY clear and openly stated opinions and values and for the likes of the creepy succubi, puppets and inccubi of UKIP leadership to berate me for having clearly held values and opinions makes them look the fools they clearly prove to be!

FOR THE RECORD:Yet again I repeat I have NEVER, on any issue in any place or at any time, have I deliberately lied or set out to mislead anyone on any issue.

Further in all my many postings on the internet I have ALWAYS shown clearly who I am and have always made my contact details readily available.

Further I have ALWAYS strenuously endeavoured to provide accurate FACTS and clear opinions.

Further I have ALWAYS made it clear that if ANYONE believes I have made an error of FACT and have contacted me in a polite and adult manner using an identified and contactable legal persona I have been all too willing to correct any fact which they can substantiate to be untrue.

To date NEVER has any material FACT of consequence been shown to be false, untrue or deliberately misleading.

IF you disagree and can show reason for any material FACT to be corrected do contact me and any required and substantiated substantive correction will be made, acknowledged and if need be apologised for. I will NOT merely make a clandestine adjustment or removal of such an error!. .

As regular readers of my blogs which are consistent in their support of UKIP members & the founding principles of UKIP – NEVER ONCE have the low lifes and cowards that seemingly form UKIP’s Leadership and the cowards & liars of their claque ahown a single solitary second of support, by me, for The EU, for theirs or anyone elses corruption and lies!

Nor has a single solitary posting I have EVER made been shown to be untrue, misleading or a lie in ANY material way – unlike their frequent lies and dishonest self serving spin!.

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~

.

Tuesday, 3 January 2012

We note that the Wolfman ‘Failed London Mayoral Candidate’ McGough has been showing increasing signs of mental derangement and instability. He has, of course, always been slightly unhinged but he appears to have got much worse over the last few weeks. McGough is now a man obsessed. And who are the subjects of this obsession? ……. None other than Greg Lance-Watkins and his wife.

The Wolfman has been sending thousands of emails to the couple every month. Hundreds are sent on a daily basis! Some messages state that McGough has been receiving strange phone calls from someone claiming to a ‘homosexual former airline mogul with a knighthood’. See picture blow. Click on it for a clearer view. Another example of the McGough’s mental breakdown?

Many of the emails ask why GLW is ignoring him. It reminds one of a lovesick teenager who can’t accept that the object of his desire is just not interested. Indeed, many of the messages are addressed to ‘Dearest Greg’ and end with the words ‘yours as ever’. So has the Wolfman reached a crisis point in his life? We hear that his marriage is less than perfect. Is he now so unsure of his sexuality that he sees GLW as a potential partner? McGough has even sometimes featured a picture of GLW as his avatar on the British Democracy Forum! Such is love! So when is the Wolfman going to come out of the closet?

Or does McGough swing both ways? Other emails carry love messages to Lee, GLW’s wife, bearing the word ‘babes‘ or ‘Lee baby’. We wonder what McGough’s wife thinks about this?

1 comments:

Hi,I understand that Mick McGough’s harassment falls into the realms of ctiminally unbalanced – however his lies and smears are merely the efforts of an obvious inafequate to defame.Clearly Mick McGough is damaging to UKIP and EUroRealism and for them to have the support of criminals, liars, cheats and cowards like Mick McGough is unfortunate – for them to fail to address this behaviour deeply damages UKIP as it shows them for the self serving frauds and hypocrits their leadership are.Similarly the cowards, liars and creeps sheltering their lies and their identities behind childish false names shows them for the trash they are.Neither Mick McGough or the likes of cowards like Independent UKIP, SDP, Skeptik have even the integrity to apologise for their lies and smears and hugely demean UKIP with such corrupt dishonesty.UKIP’s ONLY hope is to clean up its act and try to professionalise distancing themselves from scum like this so redolent of the bad old racist National Front days!The EUroRealist majority in these United kingdoms deserve better and more honest, more professional representation of their vakues than UKIP has ever provided.Regards,Greg_L-W.

In passing it is abundantly clear that despite his posturings and idiocy Mick McGough and thus it seems UKIP’s other executives haven’t a clue who is or is not a member of The Junius Team, they make little more than fools of themselves with their fatuous guesses and sly hints.

It is also abundantly clear that Mick McGough is a dishonest and corrupt individual prepared to lie and cheat for his personal gain CLICK HERE and without the integrity, ethics or basic morality to apologise when shown to be dishonest and corrupt – A low life, beneath contempt whose support for UKIP and his claims of EUroScepticism are hugely damaging to the peoples of these United Kingdoms and our fight for liberty and self determination as an independent sovereign nation.

I do see it as a sad reflection on UKIP that it has not only brought together this collection of rather unpleasant people but that it permits egregious filth like Mick McGough or for that matter Stuart Agnew to speak on their behalf – why do they so consistently shoot themselves in both feet?

Listen to the manner and demeanour of Mick McGough and would you in all honesty be willing to buy a used car off this Essex oik with a track record of lies, corruption, dishonesty and gutter behaviour that is well known to the informed members. An odious little man who would cross the country for the opening of an envelope if there was something ANYTHING in it for him.

You will remember this is the odious little bean counter who could not even be trusted to keep Gerard Batten MEP’s internal correspondence in confidence when he thought he could make personal gain from it. This is the sordid little man who seers with consistency at those who seek transparency and probity within UKIP.

You may remember that when Andrew Smith was shown to have lied and cheated embroiling UKIP in lies to The Electoral Commission that resulted in a resounding Guilty verdict against UKIP it was Mick McGough boot licking his way to personal gain in his defence.

It was this same little creep who was telling lies about John West being involved with The BNP and who can not even understand that I might seek honesty and integrity within UKIP because I believe in honesty and integrity and this desperate little failure of mankind endlessly lies and sneers trying to impugn my motivation and project the same lack of morality he personally displays, where everything it seems must be for money or personal gain – Oh how his behaviour shows him for the slime he is!

“He that is of the opinion money will do everything may well be suspected of doing everything for money”.

That a party has various low lifes and noxious individuals is not really surprising but that a party espousing British values and patriotism gathers so many liars and cheats like McGough, Agnew, Williams, Curtis, Denny and the like together as its NEC and leadership beggars belief and does nothing but bring shame on these United Kingdoms.

Yes it is understandable a whinning oik like McGough would prostitute himself for money and personal gain but that he not only is clearly willing to prostitute UKIP but to act as its pimp may depress many but that UKIP itself would sink to such a level as to employ such a proven dishonest man to make a case speaks volumes of why until UKIP is Cleaned-up there just is no case that can be made for anyone ethical voting for the Party – they are clearly unfit for purpose.

Even more worrying is that Mick McGough has willingly made a video based on his own lies and his own concepts of marketing, where Money is clearly his only God, speaks volumes of Mick McGough’s utter lack of principles but that no one corrected his dishonesty on an official UKIP video is a staggering reflection on the Party’s lack of integrity and self serving greed of its leadership.

“He who would trade liberty for some temporary security of income, deserves neither liberty nor security”.

Only someone of the lack of moral fiber that Mick McGough consistently shows us would be willing to prostitute principle for income from The EU – There is absolutely no position that makes whores of ones’ daughters or ones’ friends based upon a claim that to do so denies others willing to prostitute themselves from income!

To be a little more specific it is morally repugnant thaty UKIP can have sanctioned the pack of lies being peddled on this video – let us consider just one, which has no bearing on the emotive ‘con’ sales technique of these grubby amateurs:We see the odious Mick McGough holding aloft a mock cheque for £350K claiming it to be made out to UKIP – THIS IS A LIE, do read the regulations under no circumstances can this happen granting UKIP free use of EU money for Party Political gain.

That the duplicitous worm then goes on to talk of howmuch an election cost UKIP is dishonest in conflating the two values as the money used to bribe Politicians to prostitute their Parties and undermine National Political Parties is NOT available for Party usage!

I was interested to note on The UKIP Forum that even some of the members have seen through the scam put forward in this squalid little video.

It is also worth wondering, since we know he is dishonest corrupt and untrustworthy, whether Stuart Agnew is acting for his masters at The NFU or his UKIP electorate as he tries to mislead people on this issue.

Either way we do have it on very clear record that Stuart Agnew couldn’t give a damn for democratic principles and has openly stated that whatever the vote outcome he will be joining a PEPP for his personal gain!

We also note that it was abundantly clear that at The South East debate on the issue that as in The South West the audience were very clearly against the sell out to assist The EU implement its aims.

I gather the results are so resoundingly opposing UKIP aiding The EU and joining yet another sordid alliance of others as with the utterly unprincipled extremists of The EFD as at the moment that learning from their long sujourn of very little benefit to Britain in the bars and bordellos of Brussels and Strasbourgh the UKIP leadership and its parasites have learned how to Kontrol any danger of democratic principle and it is now clear that realising they would lose the debate they are NOE changing the question!

As with France, Holland and Ireland when the vote was NO – EU methods were brought to play and they were forced to vote again on a slightly nuanced question! As with The EU so also with UKIP leadership as you will remember that UKIP resoundingly voted NO to this duplicitous sell out at UKIP’s own conference so since that was clearly not the result the leadership wanted for their self enrichment scams UKIP like the Irish, Dutch and French are being forced to vote again!